Hi everyone,
As you all know, it's somewhat annoying when a version bump in a
package such as xorg-server triggers a need to rebuild reverse
dependencies, and it would be really great if we could automate this.
We already have something that's very close to a solution in EAPI 3,
called the 'opera
Should we enable FEATURES=userpriv by default? If we do that then do
we also need to support RESTRICT=userpriv? Maybe RESTRICT=userpriv
should not be supported on the grounds that it is never justified?
What about prefix support (in EAPI 3), which often doesn't have root
privileges?
--
Thanks,
Zac
justin wrote:
> FEATURES=userpriv has problems with distcc. I think it is only when used
> in combination with pump mode but there I am not sure.
That can be fixed, right? How about after it's fixed?
--
Thanks,
Zac
On 12/19/2009 04:33 AM, Diego Elio “Flameeyes” Pettenò wrote:
> But I think that we should really use both: Patrick's should be better
> for I/O so maybe you (or Zac) can come up with a script to just try
> unpack and prepare phases for all ebuilds rather than keeping the whole
> merge…
A script t
On 12/26/2009 05:15 AM, Thomas Sachau wrote:
> On 12/26/2009 11:25 AM, Fabian Groffen wrote:
>> On 25-12-2009 15:00:36 +0100, Thomas Sachau wrote:
>>> Did you actually read my lines? I did NOT request an ACK to add it to
>>> PMS and next EAPI with a complete spec. zmedico also has no problem
>>> wi
On 01/22/2010 12:58 AM, Torsten Veller wrote:
> EAPI-3 was approved by the council during their last meeting (2010-01-18).
>
> Which portage versions do support it?
> (I wasn't able to find it in the docs.)
It's supported in portage-2.1.7.17 and 2.2_rc62 which have just been
released.
--
Thanks
On 01/29/2010 01:45 PM, Jacob Godserv wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 16:43, Zac Medico wrote:
>> It's supported in portage-2.1.7.17 and 2.2_rc62 which have just been
>> released.
>
> Just to clarify: it's EAPI 3 and not EAPI 3_pre2?
>
Right, EAPI 3_pre2 is deprecated now.
--
Thanks,
Zac
On 01/29/2010 01:44 PM, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> zmedico/portage folk: Can we have a phase during binpkg install, that
> lets us check ELF linkages before the files get moving to ${ROOT}?
Yeah, portage-2.2 has a LinkageMap class that we can use to verify
that all the needed sonames are present.
-
On 01/28/2010 09:24 PM, Max Arnold wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 04:17:41PM +0100, Beber wrote:
>> So, do you guys plan to implement a such thing ? That's one of the
>> features that is mostly missing imho. The principal miss in on client
>> side as I have tools to manage packages but would like
On 01/30/2010 10:11 AM, Duncan wrote:
> Thanks. I knew the PORTAGE_BINHOST and --config-root bits, but hadn't
> thought about the tree not being needed, save for the profiles. I
> recently setup a netbook based on a Gentoo image compiled elsewhere, and
> while it's now functional, I'm still tw
On 01/31/2010 06:47 AM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On 22 January 2010 08:58, Torsten Veller wrote:
>> When can we stabilize EAPI-3 ebuilds?
>
> Note that you can't stick EAPI 3 ebuilds in gentoo-x86, even
> package.masked, until the Portage version used to generate the
> metadata shipped by rsync s
On 02/06/2010 03:03 AM, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote:
> 2010-02-05 17:40:00 Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis napisał(a):
>> - Dependency on Python 2 should be set correctly. You can specify it
>> directly in
>> {,R}DEPEND or use PYTHON_DEPEND.
>>
>> Example:
>> PYTHON_D
On 02/07/2010 01:10 PM, Stelian Ionescu wrote:
> Wouldn't it be a good idea to use "set -e" in the ebuild environment ?
> I've seen cases of ebuilds calling epatch without inheriting from eutils
> which compiled and installed (apparently) fine but possibly broken
> binaries. Examples of cases where
Hi,
Since portage-2.1.7.x is stable now, with ACCEPT_LICENSE support, we
can think about deprecating check_license [1]. This will allow us to
avoid using PROPERTIES=interactive in cases when it is due to
check_license alone, since anything with a license in the @EULA
license group is automatically
On 02/21/2010 09:08 AM, Petteri Räty wrote:
> On 20.2.2010 14.28, Zac Medico wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Since portage-2.1.7.x is stable now, with ACCEPT_LICENSE support, we
>> can think about deprecating check_license [1]. This will allow us to
>> avoid using PROPERTIE
On 02/21/2010 02:36 PM, Petteri Räty wrote:
> On 21.2.2010 14.17, Zac Medico wrote:
>> On 02/21/2010 09:08 AM, Petteri Räty wrote:
>>> On 20.2.2010 14.28, Zac Medico wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Since portage-2.1.7.x is stable now, with ACCEP
On 02/21/2010 03:00 PM, Petteri Räty wrote:
> On 21.2.2010 14.49, Zac Medico wrote:
>> On 02/21/2010 02:36 PM, Petteri Räty wrote:
>>> On 21.2.2010 14.17, Zac Medico wrote:
>>>> On 02/21/2010 09:08 AM, Petteri Räty wrote:
>>>>> On 20.2.2010 14.28, Zac
On 02/21/2010 04:35 PM, Petteri Räty wrote:
> On 21.2.2010 15.21, Zac Medico wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Likely there wouldn't be any breakage with it doing it in EAPI 3 but it
>>>>> would be against the eclass contract of not changing expected behavio
On 02/22/2010 10:46 AM, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> So I've started to see the proliferation of manual || structures for USE deps,
> where virtuals would normally be used, but it seems that either USE deps from
> the virtuals aren't propogated down to the packages themselves, or developers
> aren't a
On 02/24/2010 10:49 AM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Feb 2010 13:06:37 -0800
> Zac Medico wrote:
>> There was a bug in > which prevented propagation of USE deps in virtuals. If you set
>> EAPI=3 in the ebuilds then that will ensure that users will not
>> encount
On 02/25/2010 11:32 AM, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> Sorry for the short notice, but the boxes as noted above are going to
> have some brief downtime in the next hour for IP renumbering.
>
> It will briefly take out the anonvcs service, as well as a lot of
> rsync.g.o capacity.
>
> Total downtime sh
On 03/01/2010 01:24 PM, Ben de Groot wrote:
> For some reason beyond my understanding, we have the cups useflag
> enabled by default in profiles. This has started to generate circular
> dependencies, at least for desktop profile users (gtk -> cups ->
> poppler -> gtk). I propose we no longer enable
On 03/05/2010 01:41 AM, Joshua Saddler wrote:
> If it's stable, then users get it by default, assuming they run the stable
> tree. They install a recent stage3, build their system, run emerge -uD world.
> Bam, a useless version of Python is now installed. Nothing on their systems
> will use it,
On 03/05/2010 03:09 AM, Maciej Mrozowski wrote:
> Now on more serious note, ideally python could be treated just like any other
> non-leaf package (in dependency tree), just like library. In such case it's
> completely reasonable to stabilize the newest version of such 'library',
> especially wh
On 03/05/2010 11:26 AM, Duncan wrote:
> Zac Medico posted on Fri, 05 Mar 2010 03:24:29 -0800 as excerpted:
>
>> On 03/05/2010 03:09 AM, Maciej Mrozowski wrote:
>>> Now on more serious note, ideally python could be treated just like any
>>> other non-leaf package (
On 03/06/2010 04:24 AM, Richard Freeman wrote:
> On 03/05/2010 08:06 AM, Ben de Groot wrote:
>> On 5 March 2010 04:18, Graham Murray wrote:
>>> 3. Include one or both of the packages in the stage tarball.
>> None of the packages involved (gtk+, cups and poppler) is in any
>> shape or form essenti
On 03/12/2010 11:39 AM, Petteri Räty wrote:
> In eclasses there's often use for outputting QA warnings for ebuild
> authors (at least in java and python could immediately make use of
> this). Currently Portage has eqawarn available but it's considered
> internal. Hopefully eqawarn finds it's way to
On 03/19/2010 12:15 AM, Dale wrote:
> I think this is because people that use Gentoo do so because it doesn't
> install things they don't need. Why install a package that is used by
> no other package? It's pointless.
>
> I would also add, if it gets installed and is used by no other package,
>
On 03/19/2010 01:52 AM, Dale wrote:
> I think what most people want is for portage not to pull in a package
> that nothing uses. I'm not a dev nor a programmer but I have yet to see
> any good reason for installing something that is not being used. It's
> not being tested to see if it is stable.
On 03/19/2010 06:31 AM, Thomas Kahle wrote:
> On 03/19/2010 02:06 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> On Thursday 18 March 2010 09:17:43 Thomas Kahle wrote:
use.local.desc is automatically generated from metadata.xml files, so
it's the same thing
>>>
>>> And this will soon be properly documented
On 03/20/2010 02:56 AM, Jean-Marc Hengen wrote:
> Duncan wrote:
>> ...
>
> ++ - I can only add the saying "With freedom comes great responsibility.".
>
> Maybe the python herd could maintain a little status page which covers
> informations like:
> - Estimated python 3 compatibility in respect to
On 03/26/2010 02:02 AM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> El jue, 25-03-2010 a las 11:37 -0400, Richard Freeman escribió:
>> On 03/24/2010 11:47 PM, Joshua Saddler wrote:
>>> Even then, it'll likely get
>>> installed first, as users will probably learn about p.masking it only
>>> *after* they install it.
>>
>>
On 03/26/2010 12:59 AM, Marijn Schouten (hkBst) wrote:
> On Thursday 25 March 2010 20:05:17 Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote:
>> 2010-03-25 19:34:24 Roy Bamford napisał(a):
>>> On 2010.03.24 21:12, William Hubbs wrote:
>>> The case where Python-3 cannot be used as the default Python is
>>
On 03/24/2010 08:47 PM, Joshua Saddler wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 16:12:55 -0500
> William Hubbs wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 09:36:52PM +0100, Ben de Groot wrote:
>>> We agree that this is the minimum that should be done. But our
>>> Python lead stubbornly refuses to honor this reasonab
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/31/2010 01:19 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 22:08:40 +0200
> Sebastian Pipping wrote:
>> Is there some kind of evilness in this usage of has_version that I am
>> not aware of?
>
> Unfortunately, yes.
>
> Historically, has_ve
On 03/31/2010 01:37 PM, Sebastian Pipping wrote:
> On 03/31/10 22:31, Zac Medico wrote:
>> For those who may not know, has_version can be called in pkg_preinst
>> to find the previous version, and the result can be stored in a
>> variable for us in pkg_postinst.
>
&g
On 03/31/2010 01:52 PM, Sebastian Pipping wrote:
> On 03/31/10 22:42, Zac Medico wrote:
>> Well, it works fine when not called for the same $CATEGORY/$PN, and
>> even for the same $CATEGORY/$PN it works fine for other slots it
>> they happen to be installed.
>
> Good po
On 03/31/2010 02:16 PM, Sebastian Pipping wrote:
> On 03/31/10 23:05, Zac Medico wrote:
>> Yeah, but the "same slot" thing is a little ambiguous since the
>> given atom could possibly match multiple slots that include the one
>> whose postinst is currently ru
On 04/01/2010 01:44 PM, Róbert Čerňanský wrote:
> If I'm getting this right the proposed behavior is such that in case of
> conflicting use flags emerge fails and user gets a message that he
> has to set use flags as required. If so then I think it is not the right
> way to handle it. A package man
On 04/01/2010 04:41 PM, James Cloos wrote:
> And given that portage inappropriately ignores a fixed eclass in the
> OVERlay, that means that every time one syncs one must re-patch the
> offending eclasses.
You can configure eclass override behavior via eclass-overrides in
/etc/portage/repos.conf,
On 04/01/2010 05:17 PM, Brian Harring wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 01, 2010 at 05:14:20PM -0700, Zac Medico wrote:
>> You can configure eclass override behavior via eclass-overrides in
>> /etc/portage/repos.conf, as documented in `man portage`. There are a
>> number of caveats to
On 04/03/2010 04:16 AM, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote:
> I'd like to add a package for spin to the tree (it's used at several
> universities, including mine and Caltech).
>
> However, it's not straightforward. The basic license is for educational
> purposes only.
>
> Here are my suggestions how to im
On 04/03/2010 10:11 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am using umask 027 on my Gentoo boxes, and setgid bit set on a few
> directories crucial to userpriv-enabled merges. This way, I do not have
> to worry about running e.g. layman through 'sg' or similar tools, as
> all newly-created files i
On 04/06/2010 07:22 AM, James Cloos wrote:
>>>>>> "ZM" == Zac Medico writes:
>
> ZM> You can configure eclass override behavior via eclass-overrides in
> ZM> /etc/portage/repos.conf, as documented in `man portage`.
>
> ,< From that m
On 04/09/2010 04:34 AM, Fabio Erculiani wrote:
> They are available in the "sabayon" overlay. Is there anybody
> interested in helping me out for the integration and, perhaps,
> merge-into-Portage part?
That sounds interesting. I was planning to add public apis for the
packagekit portage backend t
On 04/12/2010 10:17 AM, James Cloos wrote:
>>>>>> "ZM" == Zac Medico writes:
>
> ZM> On 04/06/2010 07:22 AM, James Cloos wrote:
>>>>>>>> "ZM" == Zac Medico writes:
>>>
> ZM> You can configure eclass override
On 04/12/2010 11:00 AM, Brian Harring wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 01:30:21PM -0400, James Cloos wrote:
>> A reasonable alternative would be to have a separate variable in make.conf,
>> such as ECLASS_OVERLAY_DIRS, which specifies acceptable overlays for
>> eclasses.
>>
>> In most cases, users
Hi everyone,
Should we add a RESTRICT=parallel value for ebuilds that can't be
built at the same time as other ebuilds? Brian says we need it for
things like xorg-server which calls eselect opengl.
If we truly need this, is RESTRICT=parallel a good name? We could
make it a PROPERTIES value instea
On 04/23/2010 08:14 AM, James Cloos wrote:
>> "HvD" == Harald van Dijk writes:
>
> HvD> Let's say this is in the tree:
>
> HvD> foo.eclass:
> HvD> DEPEND="dev-lang/python:2.6"
>
> HvD> bar-1.ebuild:
> HvD> inherit foo
>
> HvD> Let's say this is in your overlay:
>
> HvD> foo.eclass:
> HvD>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 04/24/2010 01:42 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I would like to raise a discussion on the topic of the /etc/portage/env
> files support hack, implemented in the profile.bashrc file in gx86 base
> profile [1].
Your patch is in portage git now
On 09/06/2010 12:28 AM, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:
> - Am I expected to run revdep-rebuild after every emerge -uavDN world now?
Yes, that's always been the case.
> - If so, can we get more integration with emerge itself?
I'd like us to add EAPI support for abi-slot dependencies, as
discussed in thes
On 09/17/2010 11:39 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Friday, September 17, 2010 05:34:32 Robin H. Johnson wrote:
>> 1. Never RDEPEND on virtual/linux-sources, it will bring kernel sources
>>in during binpkg installs.
>
> repoman time ?
> -mike
It's in git now:
http://git.overlays.gentoo.org/gi
On 09/19/2010 04:43 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> many man pages exist merely as a redirect to another man page:
> $ xzcat /usr/share/man/man1/zcat.1.xz
> .so man1/gzip.1
>
> compressing these tiny (always?) results in a larger file. that means we
> arent saving space, and we're adding overhead at
On 09/10/2010 03:45 AM, Christian Faulhammer wrote:
> 1. Disable usblp in your kernel configuration by setting
> CONFIG_USB_PRINTER=n. Don't forget to rebuild the kernel and reboot
> with that new image.
If you're like me and you have CONFIG_USB_PRINTER=m then the above
suggestion is a bit extrem
On 09/30/2010 01:09 AM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> And I would also ask, Where a portage-2.1.9 version will be stabilized?
>
> Thanks a lot for the info :-)
If we don't find any really annoying regressions in portage-2.1.9.12
then that release will be stabilized about 30 days from now. We
haven't been
On 09/30/2010 12:41 AM, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:
> As another dev who generally runs stable (except things that I hack
> on), another question: is it actually possible, as Diego seems to
> suggest, to have two portages installed?
You can run portage directly from a checkout if you export modified
ve
On 09/30/2010 09:40 AM, Samuli Suominen wrote:
> Get Portage 2.2_rcX (with preserved-libs) feature released into ~arch. ;-)
We probably won't be able to stabilize portage-2.2 at the same time
as openssl, so we should probably be thinking of more short-term
solutions if this openssl thing is a real
On 09/30/2010 09:31 AM, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Just by accident I noticed during emerge something that may lead to major
> confusion: the just stabilized openssl-1.0.0-r3 contains the following code:
>
> pkg_postinst() {
> ...
> has_version ${CATEGORY}/${PN}:0.9.
On 10/01/2010 08:13 AM, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
> Does lafilefixer fix binpkgs now? As well as the vdb manifests for the
> files? If it doesn't, I strongly object to having it as an official
> recommendation. A surprisingly large no. of people (at least on
> bugzilla) have FEATURES=buildpkg .
It w
On 10/01/2010 12:12 PM, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 11:24 PM, Diego Elio Pettenò
> wrote:
>> Il giorno ven, 01/10/2010 alle 20.43 +0530, Nirbheek Chauhan ha scritto:
>>>
>>> Does lafilefixer fix binpkgs now? As well as the vdb manifests for the
>>> files? If it doesn't, I str
On 10/01/2010 02:10 PM, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 2, 2010 at 1:08 AM, Zac Medico wrote:
>> On 10/01/2010 12:12 PM, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
>>> Right, so a few weeks later when they re-merge a binpkg, they suddenly
>>> get build failures again. And th
On 10/02/2010 05:21 AM, Peter Volkov wrote:
> В Птн, 01/10/2010 в 12:38 -0700, Zac Medico пишет:
>> Maybe advise them to use post_pkg_preinst instead of post_src_install,
>> so it works even for binary packages.
>
> Is it possible for portage-2.1.8.x to depend on la
On 10/04/2010 08:45 AM, Fabio Erculiani wrote:
> Am I the only one who is waiting for a Portage 2.2 unmask on ~arch?
> It's taking months if not years ;-)
Well, portage-2.1.9.x is essentially the same codebase as "portage-2.2".
If you look at the 2.1.9 branch, you can see that it diverges and at t
On 10/04/2010 12:50 AM, Michael Haubenwallner wrote:
>
> On 09/30/2010 09:36 AM, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
>> as I've only recently "graduated to developer", I've got a question about
>> this. Diego, your request makes perfect sense to me. But, so far I always
>> thought "Python, portage, and gc
On 10/04/2010 09:13 PM, Duncan wrote:
> Zac Medico posted on Mon, 04 Oct 2010 10:40:29 -0700 as excerpted:
>
>> On 10/04/2010 12:50 AM, Michael Haubenwallner wrote:
>>>
>>> On 09/30/2010 09:36 AM, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
>>>> [Portage is somethi
On 10/05/2010 05:26 PM, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 05, 2010 at 05:53:50PM -0400, James Cloos wrote:
>> Have portage note in the ebuild log what was signed, by what key, and
>> whether the sigs were true.
> zmedico: can we include this in the repoman commit sig?
Sure. Currently, repoman
On 10/06/2010 12:47 PM, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> '(Signed Manifest commit)' - alter that to include the signing key env var.
Ok, it's in git now:
http://git.overlays.gentoo.org/gitweb/?p=proj/portage.git;a=commit;h=c7d24916a47f08755932fdad1344f08808ad8022
--
Thanks,
Zac
On 11/02/2010 03:20 PM, Alexis Ballier wrote:
> On Monday 01 November 2010 13:33:47 Zac Medico (zmedico) wrote:
>> zmedico 10/11/01 16:33:47
>>
>> Modified: portage-2.2.0_alpha1.ebuild portage-2.2_rc67.ebuild
>> ChangeLog
On 11/01/2010 10:06 AM, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote:
> I would like to suggest improvement in handling of EAPI in profiles:
> Some files could optionally end with ":${EAPI}", which would be used to
> specify, which EAPI
> should be used for parsing of given file. It would concern at
Athul Acharya wrote:
>>So to sum it up, it's not really (for me maybe) about enterprise v. hobbyist,
>>it's about moving ANYONE over to Linux, period.
>
>
> Actually, I rather like to think that Gentoo is one of the very few
> distributions that cares more about meeting existing Linux
> [power]u
Anthony Gorecki wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I've been encountering an unusual string of errors while attempting to
> retrieve information from a database using DBD-mysql-2.9007 and mysql-4.1.12.
> The database in question is of type InnoDB. Below is an example:
>
> #!/usr/bin/perl -w
>
> use strict;
>
Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Wednesday 20 July 2005 05:54 pm, Brian D. Harring wrote:
Out of curiousity, has any put any thought into some automated method
or hook for allowing restarting of rc-scripts on upgrade/re-emerge of
a package?
such a completely automated thing is a bad idea ... detecti
Duncan wrote:
Zac Medico posted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, excerpted below, on Thu,
21 Jul 2005 05:10:25 -0700:
This could be an optional feature such as FEATURES="restartservices". The
CONFIG_PROTECT functionality could remain as is. Portage could use a
special ebuild varia
On 11/15/2010 10:23 AM, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote:
> 2010-11-03 06:18:01 Zac Medico napisał(a):
>> When you need to use a new EAPI, why not just create a sub-profile that
>> uses the existing 'eapi' file support? For example, you could create
>> 10.1
On 11/15/2010 02:02 PM, Alexis Ballier wrote:
> Since none are slotted, I don't understand what outcome you expect by
> contacting the maintainers.
> At best, perl-cleaner and ocaml-rebuild.sh shall be merged into portage in a
> preserve-libs like manner.
In case some aren't aware, I'll mention
On 10/25/2010 06:24 AM, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote:
> use.unsatisfiable and package.use.unsatisfiable files would cause that
> `repoman` would treat
> given USE flags in the same way as masked USE flags. These files wouldn't
> affect behavior of
> `emerge`:
> - If user has enabled
On 11/21/2010 05:27 PM, Delian Xu wrote:
> For example,
> Sometime when you install or update a package, it would failed by 'masked'
> reasons and you have to deal with the failure
> (Though you can use a auto-unmask tool here). However, users would hope
> the Portage / emerge system give an opt
On 11/21/2010 09:54 PM, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>> On Sun, 21 Nov 2010, Alexis Ballier wrote:
>
>>> Also, for an ebuild with empty KEYWORDS, repoman will not indicate
>>> any problems with dependencies.
>
>> by default with a p.mask it doesnt either.
>
> Yes, but it has an option to enable it,
On 11/22/2010 09:09 AM, Zac Medico wrote:
> On 11/21/2010 09:54 PM, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sun, 21 Nov 2010, Alexis Ballier wrote:
>>
>>>> Also, for an ebuild with empty KEYWORDS, repoman will not indicate
>>>> any problems with d
On 11/28/2010 10:15 AM, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote:
> 2010-11-19 16:51:03 Zac Medico napisał(a):
>> On 10/25/2010 06:24 AM, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote:
>>> use.unsatisfiable and package.use.unsatisfiable files would cause that
>>> `repoman
On 11/28/2010 12:07 PM, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote:
> 2010-11-28 20:59:05 Zac Medico napisał(a):
>> It seems like you're trying to bypass an important function of repoman
>> though. The idea is that repoman is supposed to protect users from
>> experiencing
On 11/22/2010 05:30 PM, Zac Medico wrote:
> Anyway, there's support for checking dependencies with empty KEYWORDS here:
>
> http://git.overlays.gentoo.org/gitweb/?p=proj/portage.git;a=commit;h=9ed6332f2015e41f072f897764f550c5574ea96f
This is included in >=sys-apps/portage-2.1.9.
On 11/28/2010 01:56 PM, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote:
> 2010-11-28 21:30:47 Zac Medico napisał(a):
>> It seems like the problem here is that we don't have separate profiles
>> for stable and unstable keywords. The obvious solution would be to have
>> separat
On 11/29/2010 08:43 AM, Sebastian Pipping wrote:
> On 11/29/10 17:31, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>> I guess it is triggered from pkg_postrm() of python-2.6.6-r1 which
>> until two days ago unconditionally called the following eselect
>> action:
>>
>> eselect python update --python2
>>
>> So unless y
On 11/29/2010 01:14 PM, Sebastian Pipping wrote:
> On 11/29/10 18:33, Zac Medico wrote:
>> You could also cancel it out, by checking the state in pkg_preinst and
>> saving it in an environment variable so that you can restore it in
>> pkg_postinst.
>
> Could you show
On 11/30/2010 08:26 AM, Sebastian Pipping wrote:
>* STAGE pkg_preinst (slot 2.7, version 2.7.1)
>* STAGE pkg_prerm (version 2.7, slot 2.7) <
>* STAGE pkg_postrm (version 2.7, slot 2.7) <
>* STAGE pkg_postinst (slot 2.7, version 2.7.1)
>
> Shall we give that
I've attached a list of packages, and script to generate it.
--
Thanks,
Zac
#!/usr/bin/env python
import os
import sys
import portage
if len(sys.argv) != 2 or not portage.isvalidatom(sys.argv[1]):
sys.stderr.write("usage: %s \n" % os.path.basename(sys.argv[0]))
sys.exit(1)
input_atom = porta
On 12/18/2010 01:57 AM, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> On 18-12-2010 02:45:06 +0100, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote:
>>
>> Problem #1: USE flags cannot contain "." characters.
>>
>> The following solutions have been suggested:
>> - Add support for "." characters in USE flags in EAPI="4".
>
> L
On 12/17/2010 06:13 PM, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> On 15:25 Fri 17 Dec , Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>> Things get messier when you've got || ( a >b-2.1 ) and b-2.0 is
>> installed and a is not. Should b be upgraded to 2.1, or should a be
>> selected?
>
> It depends ... see later.
>
>> What about if
On 12/23/2010 07:35 PM, Jeremy Olexa wrote:
> mapserver-5.4.2-r1.edit/temp/environment
> --- mapserver-5.4.2-r1.orig/temp/environment2010-12-23
> 21:25:57.216256714 -0600
> +++ mapserver-5.4.2-r1.edit/temp/environment2010-12-23
> 21:29:29.858254479 -0600
> @@ -297,7 +297,7 @@
> declare -x
On 12/30/2010 07:37 AM, Petteri Räty wrote:
> As the text was just approved it will take a while before Package
> Managers release new versions that declare support for EAPI 4. As such,
> the new EAPI 4 can't yet be used in the main tree. You will be notified
> as soon as you can start reaping the
On 12/31/2010 03:13 AM, Petteri Räty wrote:
> First we need to be sure that all relevant eclasses support upgrading to
> EAPI 2. As plenty of ebuilds are still in EAPI 0 it's likely that some
> eclasses are too.
As an example of things to look for, I've noticed that migration to EAPI
2 or later of
On 12/31/2010 12:42 PM, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> The main problem IMHO is that portage doesn't record which libraries
> some package links in, so it doesn't know which ones have to be
> protected from unmerge (unless explicitly stated somewhere).
> So I'd propose to add record that information. On n
On 01/01/2011 08:09 PM, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> Well, I'm still using portage-2.1, so I wans't aware of whats going
> on there. For now it seems the preservation is still done explicitly
> (preserve_old_lib calls in certain ebuilds ?). My proposal is to
> record the necessary information (eg. which
On 01/09/2011 04:00 AM, Kfir Lavi wrote:
> Hi,
> I have created an ebuild that build for me a small system.
> The RDEPEND has required packages. This works fine and when I emerge this
> ebuild,
> all the "dependencies" are installed.
> When I add
> sys-kernel/gentoo-sources
> or
> =sys-kernel/vanil
On 01/17/2011 08:10 AM, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> On 13:49 Sun 16 Jan , Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>> Does anyone care to justify their "block the old name" habits?
>
> How about playing nicely with overlays where the moves didn't happen
> (yet)?
That seems like a somewhat justifiable use case. I
On 01/27/2011 09:05 AM, Matthew Summers wrote:
> Now, as to whether to include the value ESVN_PASSWORD in the ebuild, I would
> not do that. Personally, I would setup svn+ssh and use an ssh key to access
> the repo. I do this with git using the git eclass. I am prompted for a
> password/key by port
On 01/27/2011 11:08 AM, Matthew Summers wrote:
> One question though. Since the 'portage' user has its $home set by default
> to /var/tmp/portage how would you recommend handling the ssh key situation
> since that directory is somewhat special?
Well, I've never tried it, so I don't have any recomm
On 01/28/2011 06:26 AM, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> On 11:55 Thu 27 Jan , Zac Medico wrote:
>> On 01/27/2011 11:08 AM, Matthew Summers wrote:
>>> One question though. Since the 'portage' user has its $home set by default
>>> to /var/tmp/portage how wou
On 02/01/2011 01:35 AM, Zeerak Mustafa Waseem wrote:
> Hey guys,
>
> I ran with ACCEPT_LICENSE="*" for a while and a few days ago I decided to
> look into the licenses the programs I'm using need and read up on them, then
> add them manually.
> I then remembered the license groups and proceeded
801 - 900 of 1193 matches
Mail list logo
